I was seriously considering getting a Lumia 1020 purely because of the camera, which gets rave reviews everywhere.
I was even willing to abandon Android and put up with the Windows OS. But unfortunately, to buy it unlocked would cost $600, and the only carrier that was subsidizing it was AT&T, which I have sworn off.
In the end, I got a Samsung S4 Zoom. Its camera is second only to the Lumia, it's got a great xenon flash, I get to stick with Android, it cost only about $350 unlocked, and it works on a GSM network MVNO, so my cellphone bill ends up being $40/mo., instead of $85/mo. on AT&T.
> But unfortunately, to buy it unlocked would cost $600, and the only carrier that was subsidizing it was AT&T, which I have sworn off.
All phones cost that much. 'subsidized' phones cost much more.
Unless someone's poor enough to need a carrier plan to buy a smartphone - which, then again, they should avoid going into debt even more - then an unlocked phone is by far the cheapest option.
A pity Nokia (and other companies that sell smartphones upfront) have to educate people in the basics of personal finance before they can sell a unit (not picking on you specifically, the belief that one 'saves money' by buying a carrier-locked subsidised phone is pretty common).
Let me start by saying I agree with your point about pointing out the cost of taking the "subsidy". Personally that's part of my reason for the phones I've had the last couple of years. I figured that the subsidy in fact is costing me enough that if I opt for slightly cheaper models (see below), I can, if I want to, easily justify upgrading once a year instead of once every 18-24 months as is typical for the contracts here, and given my propensity for having phones slip out of my hands and end up shattering on the floor on the other side of the room, I figured that'd be a good idea...
But going to $600 for a smartphone is not at all necessary these days unless you "must" have the very latest and greatest. For those of us willing to put up with last years performance, you can get great quad core phones with full hd (1920x1080) screens based on MTK or Rockchip CPU's for well under half that.
I swore off the flagship phones a year ago - the tier down and cheap Chinese knockoffs that do lag behind performance wise but are otherwise fantastic, are "fast enough" now that I just don't have any need for anything faster.
My latest unsubsidised phone is an iOcean X7. With an extra 3000mAh battery it cost me ca $250 for the 32GB version (internal, also supports 32GB micro SD) including paying extra to get it shipped from China in 5 days (many of these models you can also find on Amazon Marketplace from a variety of importers if uncomfortable with ordering direct). It's a fantastic phone, with just a couple of minor caveats (the GPS is shit on a number of the Chinese phones - it's a known chipset problem coupled with bad antenna design; for this model there's a known easy non-invasive fix).
I'm unlikely to consider a phone above $300 again anytime soon...
> an unlocked phone is by far the cheapest option.
That assumes the carrier provides equivalent but lower-priced subsidies-free plans. Otherwise the would-be subsidy ends up as additional profits in the carrier's pocket.
Exactly. If I'm going to go with a particular carrier anyway, then it's better to go with a subsidized phone, unless I get a discount for bringing my own unlocked phone.
The error that nailer thinks I made, I did not make.
> Unless someone's poor enough to need a carrier plan to buy a smartphone - which, then again, they should avoid going into debt even more - then an unlocked phone is by far the cheapest option.
Really, you're characterizing anyone who relies on carrier plans to buy a $600 hunk of breakable, lose-able, consumer electronics as poor? Have you considered that their priorities for their immediate disposable income may lay elsewhere?
With the exception of T-Mobile, I do not believe any other major US carrier offers cheaper non-subsidized plans. Given this, it does make sense to use the subsidy, as one is paying for it one way or the other. I really hope this situation changes.
The anti-tying enforcement is one of the EU restrictions on anti-competitive behaviour I really love... That kind of behaviour generally does not fly in Europe.
In fact, the subsidies on cellphones were border-line a problem in large parts of Europe when it started, and there are a lot of special restrictions that have been gradually applied to it (such as limits on contract lengths, restrictions on locking etc.) as authorities have grappled with how to allow the positive aspects of it without also enabling the predatory and anti-competitive behaviour the anti-tying regulations were put in place to prevent.
On Windows Phone, one thing that I like a lot is Nokia's HERE suite (maps and turn-by-turn navigation). Free and really good. The hardware is good and the OS is nice too.
One thing I was impressed is that it seems actually easier to develop for Windows Phone than for iOS or Android.
I have a Lumia 920 and I find the turn-by-turn navigation to be abysmal. It gives distances in yards and the vocabulary does not extend much past "keep right", "keep left", and "follow the course of the road". It's also flat our wrong more often than not where I live. Google tells you street names and exit numbers, which is vital in large metropolitan areas.
Also, map searching is no where near as good as Google Maps.
Two things: 1) you can change the distance units, and 2) the app will pronounces the names of many commonly-named streets, but it is certainly true that its vocabulary is much smaller than some other options.
Not too surprising; outside HN comments I have yet to find anyone actually liking these phones here (in the EU). Most people I know who have one (including me) like the hardware but not the software and they don't like the hardware enough to not get an iPhone or Android. I tried to like it but it's gathering dust only to be swept off when a client wants to order an app for it from us. After that it goes into the drawer again.
From non tech people I usually hear complaints about it still just not working all too well (annoying to hook up to computers, not being able to easily put movies and music on them compared to android/ios, no worthwhile apps compared, random crashes).
Like said; the only positive things I hear about it are raving HN'ers here or MS employees on Facebook.
Probably get accused of being a shill seeing as this is a new account (I'm not and I don't work for Microsoft and never have), but I'm a Lumia user (820) in Europe (UK) and I've had precisely no complaints about it.
The hardware is better than the software, I'll give you that, but the bad reputation is unjustified.
Not only has it never crashed, not even once in the year I've had it, but it's a hell of a lot easier to get music onto than an any Apple product. I have three iPads in my house for the wife and kids and it's hell keeping them all in sync with iTunes and managing apps and backups. Especially with the whole library deletion and Apple account thing. WiFi sync is a broken pile of crap as well.
I just plug the winphone in and use it as an MTP device. It even works on CentOS 6.5 to my surprise. Just copy mp3 files onto it.
I don't use any apps worth mentioning apart from Nokia HERE drive. The built in mail, people and calendar are pretty good and it connects to my gmail/exchange accounts fine.
Moto G is the only thing that gets close in price vs performance stats.
I think people just buy phones like fashion items these days. It's good enough but they don't like the club.
As one of those raving HN'ers (although not an MS employee) who now uses an iPhone, all of those things you mention are legitimate issues, and I don't know many WP owners who would disagree. The real heartbreaker is that even with these seemingly show-stopping issues, WP combined with Nokia hardware is so good that it's hard to turn away from. Even though the software has so many issues that have been unresolved for so long, it's still that good. It was a tough choice to give it up, I only did so because it had let me down on more than a few occasions where I really needed it.
The last time I found a mobile OS that instilled that level of "so good it doesn't matter that it's bad" was WebOS, and I frequently compare the two. Unfortunately, I see the same future for WP as what WebOS got.
This was the feeling I had when I had played with the recent versions of WP. It felt like a fantastic OS, and the hardware ran it brilliantly.
My own personal showstopper isn't a fault with the OS, but with how the phones look. Nokia just seems so far behind in terms of designing an attractive phone.
If Nokia were to release a phone that looked as nice as my Galaxy Nexus, had a large screen, and didn't cost an absolute bomb I'd probably go for WP over Android.
I'll have to disagree with you on the design aspect. In my opinion Nokia N9 has been the nicest looking and feeling phone ever. When you have it in your hand the finishing feels great, especially the subtly curved screen that has deep enough blacks that blend into the black borders seamlessly.
Personally I loved the design of the phone most of all (plus how rugged it is). I got the iPhone 5C when I switched because I like the feel of the high quality plastic better. Unfortunately the iPhone isn't quite the same; it's slippery as hell and the colors are more pastel than the bold colors of the Nokia. In my mind the Lumia 920 was the best designed phone I've ever seen, but obviously that's just one man's opinion.
I'm in Denmark, and I actually find the Windows Phone to be a nicer OS than android.
I had a Nokia Lumia 920, and then later got a Nexus 4 for free, that i'm using for now, since the Lumia had a broken screen after I dropped it.
Android feels like a messy phone, with enourmous screen space waste, and only few apps have a widget that is half decent.
It reminds me of some iphone knockoff, that for the most part has the same bells and whistles, but it's just not polished.
PS.
Denmark has a 67% iOS, and something like 30% android & 2% WP
My anecdotal experience is that for elder people and truly non-tech people (i.e. they just know they got "a new phone"), WP is fantastic, iOS is fine and Android is clumsy. If I ever replaced my dad's dumbphone with a smart one, I would definitely shoot for a WP. But it would be the cheapest Lumia I could find. :)
I really like the look and feel of my Lumia 920, but I only use it for phone calls, text messages and on rare occasions email. Because I don't use the smartphone features, iPhone and Android phones don't hold much appeal.
When the Lumia needs replacement, I don't know what else to get, iPhones seems to break easily, and the build quality of most of the non-Nokia phones seems a bit lower than I would like. Maybe I'll try the Jolla.
People like me seems to be an edge cases, and I doubt that any phone companies would be able to build a business on it.
>"From non tech people I usually hear complaints about it still just not working all too well (annoying to hook up to computers, not being able to easily put movies and music on them compared to android/ios, no worthwhile apps compared, random crashes)"
It is interesting since I have the opposite experience. I have a Lumia 920 and I find it way easier to hookup and way more stable when I compare it with my previous Android.
I'm not completely surprised at the results. I've tried to be an advocate, but Microsoft's slow development cycle along with lack of apps frustrates me more and more. No Venmo, Uber, Lyft or almost any other new and useful app that comes out. The camera is still pretty great, but alone it's just not enough to get a Lumia at the moment.
I think the app selection has actually gotten pretty good, but I do not do much ride sharing. But, the problem for me is the ridiculously slow update cycle.
Lumia 928 owner and I love my phone, for me the OS/HW is great. To me, it feels like a lot of the dissatisfaction centers around the fact that WP is an MS product. Of course there are things that could be enhanced or done better but compared with my past experience with iOS and Android, WP is tops for me. That being said, it is a beautiful thing to have choice so more power to the iOS and Android users. Get in where you fit in!
I think porting my app to WP would be quite fun. I like C#/.NET, I like VS. What I don't like is Windows 8. I'm not willing to install Windows 8 just so that I can develop an app for a small number of users.
Surely MS would help themselves by letting Windows 7 users develop for WP? Their ecosystem is small but their development platform is, in my eyes, the nicest of the bunch. The bulk of the various mobile app stores are filled with apps developed as a hobby, and requiring Windows 8 is a huge hurdle for a hobbyist.
As someone who developped for iOS, Android and Windows Phone/8, I prefer (by far) the MS ecosystem and tools. It's just nicer to use, and I can build an app in a fraction of the time (for the same quality) as it takes with other platforms.
With Xamarin, things will get even better (I'll get to use VS for 80% of my work).
The underlying API's don't allow for it (at least that's what Microsoft is saying). Although I don't fully understand what you could have against Windows 8 so much that it would stop you from developing an app. If it's Metro, you won't ever have to enter it.
You are right about the development platform... BUT:
1. The difference between usability of Eclipse, XCode, and VS has narrowed. Eclipse, especially, has slowly but steadily improved, and if that isn't sufficient, Google also has IDEA-based Android Studio in pre-release.
2. Windows is everywhere, but not the same anywhere. Different for two different CPUs in tablets, different on the desktop, different on handsets. While Android is not a direct replacement for Windows, it is the same everywhere, especially in terms of app compatibility at every API level, and in forward compatibility. Android has the best technology for scaling a single executable across many screen sizes and "distances." So expect Android in phones, tablets, cars, appliances, etc. running the same apps.
I am a bit confused by this, the author actually edited the numbers ( "Nokia has confirmed it sold 8.2 million Lumias in Q4" ) which is the double of 2012.
Not too surprising; outside HN comments I have yet to find anyone actually liking these phones here (in the EU). Most people I know who have one (including me) like the hardware but not the software and they don't like the hardware enough to not get an iPhone or Android. I tried to like it but it's gathering dust only to be swept off when a client wants to order an app for it from us. After that it goes into the drawer again."
Nokia 928 is an amazing phone and Windows 8 phone is really smooth. An article on HN yesterday talked about the rise of these phones in specific markets one them being Europe. Most people I know that actually own one really like it and think its much better than Android. Obviously the previous comment is just an opinion and not fact.
I like the design language Microsoft came up with for Windows Phone. So I bought a Nokia Lumia phone. I quickly regretted it. This was before Windows Phone 8 was released but we were promised "many of the features" with Windows Phone 7.8. I waited, and waited, and waited. Eventually I was told that they had changed their minds and Windows Phone 7.8 wouldn't even be coming to my particular phone.
Windows Phone 7 is missing a lot of very basic features. It's time consuming and frustrating using it even for the most basic tasks. The web browser is terrible. It lacks most popular 3rd-party services and apps. And the camera seems to be programmed to take out-of-focus photos.
I will never buy another Nokia phone, or Windows Phone, again. They had their chance.
My ex-neighbour is 'high' up in Nokia and I can remember having a conversation about how the Lumia would make a fantastic Android phone. I think he mentioned in passing that there was a team that briefly looked into making an Nokia Android phone, but this was killed off before the Microsoft buyout.
It's one of those phones I would buy immediately if they did an Android version. It's a very very nice piece of kit (in particular the camera) but if it doesn't run the apps you use on a daily basis, you are not going to touch it with a barge pole.
Unfortunately this will never happen. Microsoft would, in effect, be admitting their mobile platform is a dead end.
This sentiment that Nokia should make or should have made Android phones is common. I won't disagree with the article that Lumia sales are disappointing and that Nokia would have faced much harder decisions today were they not part of Microsoft.
But I find it surprising how often I hear fans of Android bemoan the dearth of Nokia Android phones. It implies that there is some hole in the Android market that would be filled by Nokia. That is remarkable—I'd go so far to say implausible—considering the wide spectrum of manufacturers already providing Android hardware.
A quick glance at Verizon's current offerings shows seven manufacturers offering Android phones via Verizon, many with multiple options. Meanwhile, for fans of Windows Phone—few of those as there may be—we have Nokia, Samsung, and HTC, offering one option each. And if rumors are to believed, Samsung may only be offering Windows Phone thanks to Microsoft paying them to do so.
To suggest that Nokia should offer Android phones implies there is some subtle quirk or distinguishing design element that would make a Nokia android preferable to the seven existing Android manufacturers' offerings. Certainly there isn't anything as substantial as a wholly new look and feel or new way of working with applications to distinguish the potential Nokia Android phone from those seven other manufacturers. So it would be something like the color of the case, maybe a few proprietary apps, the material, a few minor specs such as a good camera or wireless charging. Though many existing Android phones offer all of those things and more.
Meanwhile, being the principal Windows Phone manufacturer brings actual variation to the consumer. In fact, taking away the operating system, the Lumia hardware is not very unique. Spec-by-spec, it's about on par with an average Android phone. But it piqued my interest because it's not-Android and I wanted something new to try having become tired of the same old thing. My wife is now waiting for the Icon to be released to replace her Galaxy Nexus because she too wants to move on.
So yes, Nokia's sales are disappointing. Maybe they will look up in the future. Maybe not. But as a consumer, I treasure that they offer something more interesting than just another Android phone.
"To suggest that Nokia should offer Android phones implies there is some subtle quirk or distinguishing design element that would make a Nokia android preferable to the seven existing Android manufacturers' offerings."
There is: Nokia's Android phones would be the only ones with a Nokia name on them. Despite the problems Nokia got (itself) in, the Nokia brand still is very strong for some.
If it can run Android, I'll put Play Store apps on it, regardless of whether or not they come with the ROM. Granted, rooting a phone and putting a new ROM on it isn't exactly user friendly or easy for most people.
I said it at the time: "Two mobile-losers' getting together doesn't automatically make a winner". It's still the case. When you go beyond hard-core Nokia fans and MS fans, who buys Lumia?
People who like me got tired of Android's fragmentation and constant "clunky" feeling (I got so sick of flashing roms just to get my battery to survive the day) and don't want to buy into the Apple ecosystem. I've had a Lumia 920 for over a year now and think its absolutely the best phone I've ever owned. Co-worker also go the same phone, and switched back to iOS so he could iMessage with his mom but otherwise loved the experience as well.
It's a solid piece of hardware with a reliable and easy to use OS, other than a few missing apps (I'm not big into them myself), it's an impressive entry into the market.
I have owned a Lumia 820 and 920. The hardware was absolutely great, but I have grown to dislike Windows Phone's shortcomings:
- No separate volume control for the ringer, music, etc. I swear I've become almost deaf twice.
- No notification center. I do believe tiles are great, but they are not enough alone. I quickly want to have an overview of new messages, if possible reply inline.
- Sometimes I had random reboots (on both phones). Sometimes I couldn't turn the phone off (it would immediately start again).
- You cannot put applications on an SD card, which was annoying, given the 820's 8GB.
- There is a serious lack of applications. The applications that are there are generally of a bad quality. Even Microsoft's Facebook application is flaky compared to the iOS and Android counterparts.
I sold both phones and bought a Nexus 4, which I am very happy with, and has great battery life (not noticeably better or worse than the 920). I still like the iPhone the most (I had iPhones for 4.5 years), but the extra value of a 5s or 5c is not worth the price difference between an iPhone and a Nexus to me.
I like the "one volume control" feature best of all. I used a Nexus 4 and I now own an iPhone, and the volume behavior is... unexpected, to put it nicely. On my iPhone right now, I have the silent switch turned on, so the phone doesn't ring. I'm opening up a YouTube video to see something but I don't want to disturb the people around me. Thinking ahead at the home screen, I hold the volume down button until the volume is at the lowest. I then load up the video, and it starts blaring at full volume. I can't turn it down until it's already making noise? How does that make any sense?
While it might be better to have different controls for everything, at least on Windows Phone I know that if the phone is muted, sound will not play. At all.
Fortunately (or unfortunately) phones have moved away from being pieces of hardware a while ago. A smartphone without satisfactory/appropriate app eco-system is just a point-and-shoot camera that you can talk into. Furthermore, this is already a ruthless industry (just ask RIM) so I don't think that MS will be able to pull a magic rabbit out of an expensive hat this time.
I am rather sure that having so many phones exclusive to ATT is not helping their cause. I would call that sandbagging the numbers to have 1 phone (928), 2 "Nokia Generations" of releases behind on the largest (BY FAR) smartphone provider in the USA (Verizon). Lumia 929 has been FCC approved since November, WHERE IS IT? The holy grail 1020 still exclusive to ATT, if the numbers are so disappointing put a CDMA radio in it and SELL IT!
The dubious comfort in the mobile phone market is that when you're weak, there's always someone doing much worse still.
While Nokia managed to sell 8.2 million Lumias last quarter, Blackberry sold only 1.1 million BB10 devices in the same timeframe. The old brands have certainly fallen quick and hard.
But moving to Android means they're running a commodity OS, and they're competing against all the low-price phones from China. That would kill the company. They needed to offer a premium phone with an OS that is just compatible enough with desktops to work.
I've had a Lumia 928 for several months now (after 3 iPhones in a row), and my concern is that Microsoft isn't releasing OS updates fast enough. I get updates from Nokia for their HERE apps, but the core OS needs some fixes (single volume control, compilation albums being split up in the music app), and I'm not seeing them.
What about Samsung and HTC? They have high-end successful Android phones. Though I haven't looked at the financials of the company or anything... are they not doing well?
Samsung takes 95% of Android profits. HTC, Motorla, LG, Sony etc get to fight for the rest. I wonder how long Google is willing to be Samsung's R&D department for free.
I don't think HTC is doing very well so it would be just Samsung and they are competing for the premium segment so the cheap Chinese phone are not really a concern for them, but Nokia needed something else to differentiate, hence their choice for WP.
They still do have strong brand here, but I would compare it to BlackBerry over there in US/Canada... people sort of know it, but nobody really buys it.
I don't think they released numbers per continent/region. Maybe they sold most of the 8m units in Europe.
For comparison, Apple expected to announce between 50 to 59m iPhones sold last quarter. The results are usually a little bit better than the official guidance so maybe 60m. That means Nokia sold around 13% of what Apple probably did with the iPhone.
In some zones yes, in other nope. Anyway it seems that now worldwide they are under 3% (at least reading the article) and in the previous trimester they were around 3.4%, so they are losing ground.
As other said in some sites, it is necessary to have a critical mass at least in US OR in CHINA. And in those markets wp is really... nothing.
I was even willing to abandon Android and put up with the Windows OS. But unfortunately, to buy it unlocked would cost $600, and the only carrier that was subsidizing it was AT&T, which I have sworn off.
In the end, I got a Samsung S4 Zoom. Its camera is second only to the Lumia, it's got a great xenon flash, I get to stick with Android, it cost only about $350 unlocked, and it works on a GSM network MVNO, so my cellphone bill ends up being $40/mo., instead of $85/mo. on AT&T.